[Samba] domain-free multi-user use cases

[cn at brain-biotech.de]

Am 26.10.21 um 14:28 schrieb L. van Belle via samba:
>   
> 
>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> Van: samba [mailto:samba-bounces at lists.samba.org] Namens
>> cn--- via samba
>> Verzonden: dinsdag 26 oktober 2021 13:23
>> Aan: samba at lists.samba.org
>> Onderwerp: Re: [Samba] domain-free multi-user use cases
>>
>> Am 26.10.21 um 13:00 schrieb Eric Levy via samba:
>>
>>> Such observations may be, I hope, useful toward putting
>> aside orthodox
>>> perception, and framing the matter through broader clarity,
>> I hope to
>>> show that a wish to create a multiuser mount without a domain
>>> controller is in principle rather sensible, and not, in the most
>>> general case, diminished by many of the common objections.
>>
>> As I mentioned earlier most people in your situation and
>> setup would opt
>> for NFS with its limitations. Also as I said pam_mount would
>> in the end
>> result do what you want. So I think it very unlikely that
>> this would be
>> implemented in Samba.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> To close on a more concrete remark, NFS currently has
>> limitations, as
>>> stated previously, of its own, including the insistence on matching
>>> numeric user identifiers, and lack of support for password
>>> authentication. Features useful for Samba might be considered
>>> separately from those available in NFS.
>>
>> Most people would use NFS in similar situations. They would
>> restrict the NFS to be only mounted (or even only accessible) by clients
>> that honour the requirement for Password auth. NFS can also support ACLs
> to make
>> this more fine grained.
>>
>>
>> I don't speak for the samba team. I just think your use case
>> is just to small to really relevant.
>>
>> Or do others think different here?
> 
> Im still trying to understand what he exactly is saying.
> :-/ but thats me mostly.
> 
> But if i only take these 2 alinea's
> 
>>> To close on a more concrete remark, NFS currently has
>> limitations, as
>>> stated previously, of its own, including the insistence on matching
>>> numeric user identifiers, and lack of support for password
>>> authentication. Features useful for Samba might be considered
>>> separately from those available in NFS.
> 
> 
> Insistence on matching numeric user identifiers, great, its security.
> Lack of support for password, where, use kerberized NFS then.
> 
> Samba might be considered separately from those available in NFS.
> VFS modules in samba will help here.
> 
> I think above this is more a matter of..
> 
> Are we talking about "home" use or Bussiness use.
> For home use, yes, i can understand his point.
> For bussiness use, no, i dont get his point.
> 
> 
> Thats what i think but i might not gotten the big picture yet here.

This was the OP first post:

https://www.spinics.net/lists/samba/msg170503.html

It might help to understand.


Regards

-- 
Dr. Christian Naumer
Vice President
Unit Head Bioprocess Development

BRAIN Biotech AG
Darmstaedter Str. 34-36, D-64673 Zwingenberg
e-mail cn at brain-biotech.com, homepage www.brain-biotech.com
phone +49-6251-9331-30 / fax +49-6251-9331-11

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Zwingenberg/Bergstrasse
Registergericht AG Darmstadt, HRB 24758
Vorstand: Adriaan Moelker (Vorstandsvorsitzender), 
Lukas Linnig
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Dr. Georg Kellinghusen